2000-03, Utility Permit Fees FAILED854 MARCH 7, 2000 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 11 OF 12
VIII. NEW BUSINESS CONTINUED.
L. Discuss a new Utility Permit and possible fee structure -City
Administrator Veach addressed the Council regarding a revised Utility Permit and whether or not the Council wished
is that it is for all utility companies, one permit will
Administrator (Exhibit 10).
to impose a fee with the permit. Staffs interpretation of this permit
serve for one project, it will be for any cuts within any City right of way and if the permit requires a road cut, then the
diagram with patching instructions will be used. Council authorized staff to implement the utility permit
not they should implement fees for the permit. Council instructed
immediately. Council also discussed whether or
staff to present a structure of fees for the utility permit in resolution form at the March 21sc agenda.
Mayor Kirk stressed his views that he wanted road cuts patched with as little impact to the road as possible and that
he wanted the road to be just like it was before the road was cut. Executive Director L.C. Fortner was present and
the cuts properly but that they would never be 100 1
addressed the Council stating that he too wanted road patched
percent like they were before.
Mr. Fortner also requested input from the Council regarding the installation for a water line proposed to be installed
along Southwest 2rd Avenue, the West side of Ph Street, North to 2"d Street. The OUA's engineer's are recommending
is where it is currently, due to several large old oak trees that are already
the line be installed in the roadway, which
with the sidewalk. Council Member Chandler stated he would rather see the water line installed in
causing problems
the sidewalk. Mayor Kirk instructed Administrator Veach to find out what the Ci en ieeer would recommend
and why and bring the matter back to the Council for consideration.
M. Discuss compensation for City Clerk while serving in duel capacity
Council Member Markham made a mo se hers she as th inboth capacitiesc tween behalf n the r the Csalary
(City Clerk/Interim City Administrator) -Council Member Markham.
the seventy-three ee
and the city totalministrator's salary for ofis five thousand, six hundred eighteen dollars, eight cents ($5618.08), seconded by
Council Member Chandler.
Both Council Members Markham and Chandler stated Clerk Thomas did an outstanding job, the City did not slow down
but went forward with its project those seventy-three days. She had a lot of things on line and ready for Mr. Veach when
he got here and it made the transaction easier for him.
Mayor Kirk agreed that Clerk Thomas did a good job, his concern, however, was the precedent they would be setting
here. He cautioned the Council that in the future, they should state up front whether or not someone will receive
compensation for filling in, in another department heads capacity in addition to their own. He continued further stating
that if the Council is going to ask someone to take on the responsibility of filling in as City Administrator, they probably
should be compensated for it.
MARCH 21, 2000 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 6 OF 11 861
VI. PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE ADOPTION CONTINUED.
D. 2. c) Vote on motion.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING - Mayor.
VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
A. Discuss the City's residency requirement - Mayor Kirk.
B. Discuss a Utility Permit Fee Resolution No. 00-3 - City
Administrator/City Attorney (Exhibit 5).
VOTE
KIRK - YEA
CHANDLER - ABSENT
MARKHAM - YEA
OLIVER - YEA
WATFORD - YEA
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Kirk closed the Public Hearing at 6:30 p.m.
Mayor Kirk had requested the Council consider amending the City's residency requirement at the March 7" meeting
and he would bring the item back up for action at this meeting. Following a brief discussion, Council Member Oliver
moved to change the Department Head probation from six months to three months, after the three months
period is completed a six months residency requirement will be implemented; seconded by Council Member
Watford.
This gives a Department Head a total of nine months to meet the residency requirement and Council noted that should
a Department Head require a longer period of time, due to extenuating circumstances, that Department Head could
come back to the Council and request an extension.
VOTE
KIRK - YEA
CHANDLER - ABSENT
MARKHAM - YEA
OLIVER - YEA
WATFORD - YEA
MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Cook addressed the Council explaining that he drafted this resolution based on the information provided by
the City's engineering firm presented at the March 71h meeting-0
862 MARCH 21, 2000 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 7 OF 11
VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS CONTINUED.
B. Discuss a Utility Permit Fee Resolution No. 00-3 continued. Administrator Veach explained the first part of the resolution relates to new development and part two would relate to
any underground utility permits, (ie: Okeechobee Utility Authority), he suggested the Council leave in part one for new
developments. He discussed the fees with the Okeechobee Utility Authority's Executive Director, L.C. Fortner and he
stated he did not object to the one hundred five dollar fee for three inspections.
Following a brief discussion, Council Member Watford moved to table Resolution No. 00-3 until it could be
researched by Staff whether there are any current developers fees already in place; seconded by Council
Member Markham.
VOTE
KIRK - YEA
CHANDLER - ABSENT
MARKHAM - YEA
OLIVER - YEA
WATFORD - YEA
MOTION CARRIED.
C. Discuss recommendation from engineers regarding the installation Administrator Veach advised the Council that this item, regarding a recommendation from City Engineers for the
of a water line along Southwest 2' Avenue - City Administrator installation of a water line along Southwest 2"d Avenue is still under discussion, there are other possibilities and other
(Exhibit 6). 1 things to consider.
Council Member Watford commented that he appreciated the Utility Authority allowing the City the opportunity to work
Vlll. NEW BUSINESS. with them on thisproject.
A. Motion to appoint Terisa Suarez to the General Employee's Council Member moved to appoint Terisa Suarez to the General Employee's Pension Fund, Board of Trustees, term
Pension Fund, Board of Trustees, term - March 21, 2000 through - March 21, 2000 through November 30, 2001; seconded by Council Member Oliver. There was no discussion on this
November 30, 2001 - City Clerk (Exhibit 7). 1 matter.
VOTE
KIRK - YEA
CHANDLER - ABSENT
MARKHAM - YEA
OLIVER - YEA
WATFORD - YEA
MOTION CARRIED.
874 `"f- APRIL 4, 2000 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 8 OF 13
Vill. FIRST PUBLIC HEARING FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM CONTINUED.
The neighborhood revitalization program is an area to provide infrastructure to lower and moderate income
A. Discuss the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) neighborhoods. Infrastructure being water, sewer, roads, build parks, land assembly and site preparation for a new
Program continued. housing development, drainage activities or mitigation of future natural disaster areas that were identified in your Local
Mitigation Plan.
Commercial revitalization is a program area that the City has had in the past. As you will recall, a couple of years ago
you had a commercial revitalization grant which you did facade treatments for your downtown area. Again you can
make application for those funds if the City so desired.
In addition to the three categories that I have already identified, the City can also make application for another $600,000
for economic development grant. Economic Development Grants are based on job creation, if the City would form a
partnership with a business who would be creating new jobs for City residents and County residents. The City could
make application for up to $600,000 to provide infrastructure on behalf of that job creator, extend water and sewer lines,
build roadways, railroad spurs, lengthen runways, things like that, public infrastructure.
Mayor Kirk asked whether there were any questions or comments from the public, there were none. Council Member
Watford asked whether the Council needed to decide tonight what area they wanted to pursue for a grant. Ms. Phillips
advised that there is another item on the agenda where the Council will need to address that matter. This public hearing
serves to meet the City's legal requirements.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING - Mayor. III Mayor Kirk closed the Public Hearing at 7:08 p.m.
IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
A.1. Motion to remove from the table, Resolution No. 00-3 - Mayor. III Council Member Watford moved to remove from the table, Resolution No. 00-3 - Mayor; seconded by Council Member
Markham.
VOTE
KIRK - YEA
CHANDLER - YEA
MARKHAM - YEA
OLIVER - YEA
WATFORD - YEA
MOTION CARRIED.
APRIL 4, 2000 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 9 OF 13
875
IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS CONTINUED.
Due to action taken on proposed Ordinance No. 747 and a request by the OUA Attorney, Tom Conely to discuss this
2. Motion to adopt Revised Resolution No. 00-3 setting fees for Utility proposed Resolution when the ordinance is discussed, Council Member Oliver moved to table proposed Resolution
Permits - City Administrator/City Attorney (Exhibit 4). No 00-3; seconded by Council Member Watford.
VOTE
KIRK - YEA
CHANDLER -YEA
MARKHAM - YEA
OLIVER - YEA
WATFORD - YEA
X. NEW BUSINESS. MOTION CARRIED.
A. Consider applying for Community Development Block Grant Funds Grant Administrator, Nancy Phillips of Craig A. Smith and Associates distributed copies of a proposed Housing
in one of the following categories - Nancy Phillips, Grant Rehabilitation Grant category application and explained that she did some preliminary scoring on it. She went on to
Administrator. explain she chose the housing rehabilitation category based on a meeting she had with the City Administrator and staff
and what we did last year.
1. Housing
2. Neighborhood Revitalization The applications are due May 31, 2000 and making a lot of assumptions from last year's application the scenarios have
3. Commercial Revitalization not changed a lot. If the City applied for a $600,000 grant in the Housing Rehabilitation category a proposed budget
4. Economic Development could be, housing rehabilitation/demolition and replacement, four hundred ninety-five thousand dollars ($495,000) and
temporary relocation, fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000). Temporary relocation is used when you are moving individuals
in and out of their house and if you have to put them up in a hotel while their house is being worked on because not
everybody has friends and families they can go live with for sixty days. Grant administration cost in the housing category
11 is 15 percent of the grant award.
In Federal Fiscal Year1999, we submitted an application to the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs on
behalf of the City of Okeechobee. It called for the rehabilitation of twenty-one owner -occupied housing units. That
application had a score of 647.85 points out of a possible 1000 points. The City has been penalized fifteen points based
on an occurrence in your last CDBG application and those fifteen penalty points will stay with the City for a period of
two years or until you are funded. That application was not funded.
Assuming the same budget for Federal Fiscal Year 2000, 1 am suggesting because of the new lead based paint
requirement that starts on September 15, 2000, which is going to cost each community between and three thousand
($3,000) to five thousand dollars ($5,000) per house that we down size the number of housing units that we would do,
from twenty-one to nineteen, which would not give the City as many points. The preliminary score for the City would
be 609.85. The fundable range for 1999 was 709.43.